Cargando…

The impact of monitoring techniques on progression to chronic breast cancer-related lymphedema: a meta-analysis comparing bioimpedance spectroscopy versus circumferential measurements

BACKGROUND: Chronic breast cancer-related lymphedema (BCRL) is a potentially serious complication following treatment. Monitoring for progression to BCRL may allow for earlier detection and intervention, reducing the rate of progression to chronic BCRL. Therefore, the purpose of this meta-analysis i...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Shah, Chirag, Zambelli-Weiner, April, Delgado, Nicole, Sier, Ashley, Bauserman, Robert, Nelms, Jerrod
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer US 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7921068/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33245458
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10549-020-05988-6
_version_ 1783658400205242368
author Shah, Chirag
Zambelli-Weiner, April
Delgado, Nicole
Sier, Ashley
Bauserman, Robert
Nelms, Jerrod
author_facet Shah, Chirag
Zambelli-Weiner, April
Delgado, Nicole
Sier, Ashley
Bauserman, Robert
Nelms, Jerrod
author_sort Shah, Chirag
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Chronic breast cancer-related lymphedema (BCRL) is a potentially serious complication following treatment. Monitoring for progression to BCRL may allow for earlier detection and intervention, reducing the rate of progression to chronic BCRL. Therefore, the purpose of this meta-analysis is to evaluate the impact of monitoring techniques on the incidence of chronic BCRL among patients monitored by bioimpedance spectroscopy (BIS) and circumference as compared to background rates. METHODS: Eligible peer-reviewed studies from PubMed, CINHAL, or Google Scholar that were published in English from 2013 onward and conducted in North America, Europe, or Oceania. Incidence rates abstracted from studies were classified by BCRL monitoring method: background (no standardized BIS or circumference assessments), BIS or circumference. A random-effects model was used to calculate a pooled annualized estimate of BCRL incidence while accounting for clinical and methodological heterogeneity. Subgroup analyses examined differences in duration of follow-up as well as breast and axillary surgery. RESULTS: 50 studies were included, representing over 67,000 women. The annualized incidence of BCRL was 4.9% (95% CI: 4.3–5.5) for background studies (n = 35), 1.5% (95% CI: 0.6–2.4) for BIS-monitored studies (n = 7), and 7.7% (95% CI: 5.6–9.8) for circumference-monitored studies (n = 11). The cumulative BCRL incidence rate in BIS-monitored patients was 3.1% as compared to 12.9% with background monitoring (69% reduction) and 17.0% with circumference-monitored patients (81% reduction). CONCLUSIONS: Evidence suggests that monitoring with BIS allowing for early intervention significantly reduces the relative risk of chronic BCRL with a 69% and 81% reduction compared to background and circumference, respectively. Circumference monitoring did not appear to provide a benefit with respect to chronic BCRL incidence. Based on these results, BIS should be considered for BCRL screening in order to detect subclinical BCRL and reduce rates of chronic BCRL, particularly in high-risk patients. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1007/s10549-020-05988-6) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7921068
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher Springer US
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-79210682021-03-19 The impact of monitoring techniques on progression to chronic breast cancer-related lymphedema: a meta-analysis comparing bioimpedance spectroscopy versus circumferential measurements Shah, Chirag Zambelli-Weiner, April Delgado, Nicole Sier, Ashley Bauserman, Robert Nelms, Jerrod Breast Cancer Res Treat Clinical Trial BACKGROUND: Chronic breast cancer-related lymphedema (BCRL) is a potentially serious complication following treatment. Monitoring for progression to BCRL may allow for earlier detection and intervention, reducing the rate of progression to chronic BCRL. Therefore, the purpose of this meta-analysis is to evaluate the impact of monitoring techniques on the incidence of chronic BCRL among patients monitored by bioimpedance spectroscopy (BIS) and circumference as compared to background rates. METHODS: Eligible peer-reviewed studies from PubMed, CINHAL, or Google Scholar that were published in English from 2013 onward and conducted in North America, Europe, or Oceania. Incidence rates abstracted from studies were classified by BCRL monitoring method: background (no standardized BIS or circumference assessments), BIS or circumference. A random-effects model was used to calculate a pooled annualized estimate of BCRL incidence while accounting for clinical and methodological heterogeneity. Subgroup analyses examined differences in duration of follow-up as well as breast and axillary surgery. RESULTS: 50 studies were included, representing over 67,000 women. The annualized incidence of BCRL was 4.9% (95% CI: 4.3–5.5) for background studies (n = 35), 1.5% (95% CI: 0.6–2.4) for BIS-monitored studies (n = 7), and 7.7% (95% CI: 5.6–9.8) for circumference-monitored studies (n = 11). The cumulative BCRL incidence rate in BIS-monitored patients was 3.1% as compared to 12.9% with background monitoring (69% reduction) and 17.0% with circumference-monitored patients (81% reduction). CONCLUSIONS: Evidence suggests that monitoring with BIS allowing for early intervention significantly reduces the relative risk of chronic BCRL with a 69% and 81% reduction compared to background and circumference, respectively. Circumference monitoring did not appear to provide a benefit with respect to chronic BCRL incidence. Based on these results, BIS should be considered for BCRL screening in order to detect subclinical BCRL and reduce rates of chronic BCRL, particularly in high-risk patients. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1007/s10549-020-05988-6) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. Springer US 2020-11-27 2021 /pmc/articles/PMC7921068/ /pubmed/33245458 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10549-020-05988-6 Text en © The Author(s) 2020 Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
spellingShingle Clinical Trial
Shah, Chirag
Zambelli-Weiner, April
Delgado, Nicole
Sier, Ashley
Bauserman, Robert
Nelms, Jerrod
The impact of monitoring techniques on progression to chronic breast cancer-related lymphedema: a meta-analysis comparing bioimpedance spectroscopy versus circumferential measurements
title The impact of monitoring techniques on progression to chronic breast cancer-related lymphedema: a meta-analysis comparing bioimpedance spectroscopy versus circumferential measurements
title_full The impact of monitoring techniques on progression to chronic breast cancer-related lymphedema: a meta-analysis comparing bioimpedance spectroscopy versus circumferential measurements
title_fullStr The impact of monitoring techniques on progression to chronic breast cancer-related lymphedema: a meta-analysis comparing bioimpedance spectroscopy versus circumferential measurements
title_full_unstemmed The impact of monitoring techniques on progression to chronic breast cancer-related lymphedema: a meta-analysis comparing bioimpedance spectroscopy versus circumferential measurements
title_short The impact of monitoring techniques on progression to chronic breast cancer-related lymphedema: a meta-analysis comparing bioimpedance spectroscopy versus circumferential measurements
title_sort impact of monitoring techniques on progression to chronic breast cancer-related lymphedema: a meta-analysis comparing bioimpedance spectroscopy versus circumferential measurements
topic Clinical Trial
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7921068/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33245458
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10549-020-05988-6
work_keys_str_mv AT shahchirag theimpactofmonitoringtechniquesonprogressiontochronicbreastcancerrelatedlymphedemaametaanalysiscomparingbioimpedancespectroscopyversuscircumferentialmeasurements
AT zambelliweinerapril theimpactofmonitoringtechniquesonprogressiontochronicbreastcancerrelatedlymphedemaametaanalysiscomparingbioimpedancespectroscopyversuscircumferentialmeasurements
AT delgadonicole theimpactofmonitoringtechniquesonprogressiontochronicbreastcancerrelatedlymphedemaametaanalysiscomparingbioimpedancespectroscopyversuscircumferentialmeasurements
AT sierashley theimpactofmonitoringtechniquesonprogressiontochronicbreastcancerrelatedlymphedemaametaanalysiscomparingbioimpedancespectroscopyversuscircumferentialmeasurements
AT bausermanrobert theimpactofmonitoringtechniquesonprogressiontochronicbreastcancerrelatedlymphedemaametaanalysiscomparingbioimpedancespectroscopyversuscircumferentialmeasurements
AT nelmsjerrod theimpactofmonitoringtechniquesonprogressiontochronicbreastcancerrelatedlymphedemaametaanalysiscomparingbioimpedancespectroscopyversuscircumferentialmeasurements
AT shahchirag impactofmonitoringtechniquesonprogressiontochronicbreastcancerrelatedlymphedemaametaanalysiscomparingbioimpedancespectroscopyversuscircumferentialmeasurements
AT zambelliweinerapril impactofmonitoringtechniquesonprogressiontochronicbreastcancerrelatedlymphedemaametaanalysiscomparingbioimpedancespectroscopyversuscircumferentialmeasurements
AT delgadonicole impactofmonitoringtechniquesonprogressiontochronicbreastcancerrelatedlymphedemaametaanalysiscomparingbioimpedancespectroscopyversuscircumferentialmeasurements
AT sierashley impactofmonitoringtechniquesonprogressiontochronicbreastcancerrelatedlymphedemaametaanalysiscomparingbioimpedancespectroscopyversuscircumferentialmeasurements
AT bausermanrobert impactofmonitoringtechniquesonprogressiontochronicbreastcancerrelatedlymphedemaametaanalysiscomparingbioimpedancespectroscopyversuscircumferentialmeasurements
AT nelmsjerrod impactofmonitoringtechniquesonprogressiontochronicbreastcancerrelatedlymphedemaametaanalysiscomparingbioimpedancespectroscopyversuscircumferentialmeasurements